Here is a question/point that was brought up in my dojo the other day by one of the senior students who had attended the Aiki Expo. We were asking what it was like, etc. when he mentioned the atemi that the Daito people were using (they did not follow the Aikido variant people). He was talking about some of the atemi he had seen and felt and the issue came up of are atemi practical. This guy holds a black belt in TKD and works as a prison guard at a max security prison.

The issue was that he was unsure of if atemi were practical/applicable during the average confrontation. (In our dojo atemi are only taught after you are intermediate kyu, and they are mostly taught for damage) His basis for saying that they were not is his experience with the inmates, many of whom frequently do some form or another of body hardening constantly (repeated body punches, punching walls, kicking rails, etc). His point was that in many instances if atemi were used (such as a rib shot) the majority of the prisoners would laugh and likely try to kill him, where as blending in the direction of their energy would bring about the desired response (neutralization) much quicker and easier regardless of the power incorporated.

To illustrate his point he used me as a dummy and put me into gatame with me bent over and showed all his possible options from his officer training and striking background (kicks, punches, elbows, knees, etc) when I gave resistance. Then he put me in the same position, and when I gave resistance (trying to stand back up) he tenkan and tenchi nage while lowering himself into the high-kneeling position (cant remember the Japanese at the moment). The shock was total and I had only a vague idea what had happened.

So the question is this: why should/is atemi (be) used when not only does it allow for your own center to be taken it also creates a liability to the practitioner? and what is the value of atemi in our modern society? I realize that there are no absolutes, but I am curious about other viewpoints from differing levels of experience.

Before someone brings it up, I did read John Riggs' atemi article and a number of threads concerning atemi.

Pankration90

06-12-2005 08:11 PM

Re: Value of atemi

In the average fight, being able to strike and being able to defend against strikes are probably the most important things to know. Before you start thinking I'm biased towards striking arts, I just thought I'd mention I'm a wrestler.

Janet Rosen

06-12-2005 08:32 PM

Re: Value of atemi

My understanding of one use of atemi is as a distraction, not as a balance-taker per se--for instance, if I am aiming to enter to partner's blind space behind him, I might aim a strike at the face, with the intention not actually punch the guy out (unless he doesn't move...) but to cause a momentary flinch during which I do the blending.

Aiki Teacher

06-12-2005 10:07 PM

Re: Value of atemi

Sensei John RIggs 4th degree
Has an article that was recently published in black belt magazine on the lost art of atemi in aikido. Check it out it is a good read. HIs web site is below.

We were asking what it was like, etc. when he mentioned the atemi that the Daito people were using (they did not follow the Aikido variant people). He was talking about some of the atemi he had seen and felt and the issue came up of are atemi practical. This guy holds a black belt in TKD and works as a prison guard at a max security prison.

Firstly I'd have to ask if your sempai had enough experience with the use and application of atemi from the Daito Ryu perspective to truly understand the reasons behind them and why they were applied in certain ways in certain situations, since this would set the perspective for the rest of your question. From my experience, folks from an art such as TKD don't always approach atemi and striking with the same goals in mind as one who does a style of jujutsu (like Daito Ryu or Aikido). Many of Daito Ryu waza for example assumes that the individual is in possession of a short sword during many of the techniques, which will often be the weapon used for the finishing atemi (or cut) imho.

Quote:

Dustin Acuff wrote:

The issue was that he was unsure of if atemi were practical/applicable during the average confrontation.

This depends on whose average you are referring to. The average in a prison is hardly the average one may find out in the rest of the world where a mugging, or other type of assault may be more likely experienced than a "shanking', "blitzkrieg" or "resisting control" sort of situation as may be experienced by a prison guard.

So the question is "practical/applicable for whom, and in what environment?"

Quote:

Dustin Acuff wrote:

His basis for saying that they were not is his experience with the inmates, many of whom frequently do some form or another of body hardening constantly (repeated body punches, punching walls, kicking rails, etc). His point was that in many instances if atemi were used (such as a rib shot) the majority of the prisoners would laugh and likely try to kill him, where as blending in the direction of their energy would bring about the desired response (neutralization) much quicker and easier regardless of the power incorporated.

Well, one of our rules is that regardless of how strike hardened a person may be they need to balance to strike you with serious and damaging power. Without balance the power generation structure for a strike becomes very limited. This is where training in kuzushi is important in arts like Aikido and Daito Ryu.

Quote:

Dustin Acuff wrote:

To illustrate his point he used me as a dummy and put me into gatame with me bent over and showed all his possible options from his officer training and striking background (kicks, punches, elbows, knees, etc) when I gave resistance. Then he put me in the same position, and when I gave resistance (trying to stand back up) he tenkan and tenchi nage while lowering himself into the high-kneeling position (cant remember the Japanese at the moment). The shock was total and I had only a vague idea what had happened.

The question here is, were you really resisting (based on your strength, knowledge and use of relative body position, striking, intent and desire to escape etc.) in a manner similar to one of his inmates who were really trying to escape and/or hurt him. If not, then the comparison and illustration does not really match the original concept. There are a lot of different types of resistance.

Quote:

Dustin Acuff wrote:

So the question is this: why should/is atemi (be) used when not only does it allow for your own center to be taken it also creates a liability to the practitioner? and what is the value of atemi in our modern society? I realize that there are no absolutes, but I am curious about other viewpoints from differing levels of experience.

Imho if your centre is taken in applying atemi then you are doing something seriously wrong when applying it. Atemi is supposed to be used to take your opponent's centre using the proper timing to apply it in a manner that utilises/exploits the attacker's motion and openings much like any other technique. Imho properly applied atemi takes your attacker's physical and psychological balance initially and actually makes percussive impact as a secondary effect, which is very different to the typical TKD application of atemi or striking.

Atemi also helps us develop the other elements of timing in Aiki such as Sen no Sen (and Sensen no sen), where we start the attack before Uke finishes his own attack. On a psychological level it teaches one to move in powerfully at the right instant and take control of a situation before it overwhelms them imho.

In this situation you were referring to a sempai having this question. Did he ask your sensei about it first? I think that may be the best place to start asking questions in light of the contextual aspects.

Just my thoughts. I reserve the right to be wrong.

Gambatte.
LC:ai::ki:

DustinAcuff

06-13-2005 12:16 AM

Re: Value of atemi

Thanks everyone for your great comments!

I understand that atemi could be used to take balance, aka a light jab. But is it not more efficient to blend than to resort to striking?

LC in response to the first comment on my sempai's aptitude for atemi. Yes, he understood the purpose and reasoning for the atemi. I cannot speak from training but the only atemi I have seen (not been taught) are a bit unfriendly and uke would be lucky to only walk away from one with only a light displacement of balance. Here I admit there could be/are large gaps in my knowledge. But they were all quite amazed at the atemi used. Being officers they tend to not want to hit people b/c of bad publicity, mountians of paperwork, and it just is not nice.

In refrence to the typical confrentation, I am speaking about the average person in a public location.

The resistance was completely natural and as identical as possible in both scenarios, but it could not possibly be perfect.

It is possible, if not probable, that if an atemi were misplaced then uke could use your own extention against you.

I guess my question could be rephrased as what are the value of atemi in kuzushi as opposed to blending and redirecting?

Thanks for the comments and keep them coming!
Gamubate!
Dustin

Ron Tisdale

06-13-2005 08:34 AM

Re: Value of atemi

Quote:

But is it not more efficient to blend than to resort to striking?

Well, since the atemi in question was from Daito ryu, the shite would probably be more interested in irimi (entering) as opposed to awase (sometimes translated as blending). There are also styles of aikido that might share that pre-disposition. If you are entering into an attack, atemi can be very usefull in terms of kazushi, taking the opponants space, cutting to the center, and/or causing damage.

Law enforcement / corrections officers face special challenges...they don't like to be filmed overtly striking someone, the people they face can be excessively conditioned, some of them even like to be hit or to feel pain because that enables them to psychologically shutdown and go berserk. Often one or both parties are armed. Things can be very situation specific.

I would not assume (I don't think you are necessarily) that what was taught at the aiki-expo was the sum total of Daito ryu, or that it was targeted to a law enforcement perspective. There are aspects of the art that probably could be adapted very well to law enforcement (that's obvious if you look at the history of Daito ryu), but I doubt that's what the focus would be at an open seminar. It hasn't been at the seminars I've attended.

Your friend is wise to evaluate what he saw in light of his experience and job environment.

Best,
Ron

ian

06-13-2005 10:14 AM

Re: Value of atemi

Within aiki-jitsu, as far as I am aware, there used to be 3 levels of training. The first level extensively employed atemis, the second level less so, and the most advanced was just blending. I think being aware of atemis is more useful than practising them extensively - If a technique buggers up, you should still be in a good position to strike them. Ideally though, I believe the technique should be short and sharp (although some techniques can and do employ atemis with no loss of speed - though I believe this is mostly for distraction than for anything serious).

Strikes to jaw, floating ribs, side of neck, back of neck and sternum all seem like pretty serious atemis to me though (if you can strike effectively enough). A strike to the neck can seriously stun someone (or knock them out), although the effectiveness depends on alot of factors. Often though, I think strikes just allow some stunning before applying a more dangerous or controlling technique. e.g. military unamred training tends to focus on strikes to the neck until attacker is a bit dazed and then throwing and choking/breaking neck/kicking head. (nice?)

Lorien Lowe

06-13-2005 03:29 PM

Re: Value of atemi

Quote:

Dustin Acuff wrote:

...is it not more efficient to blend than to resort to striking?

Why does it have to be one or the other?

-LK

Adam Alexander

06-13-2005 04:02 PM

Re: Value of atemi

Quote:

Dustin Acuff wrote:

So the question is this: [1]why should/is atemi (be) used when not only does it allow for your own center to be taken it also creates a liability to the practitioner? [2] and what is the value of atemi in our modern society?

1) it's the same as any other technique, there's a right time and place to apply it. You wouldn't tenkan when it's time to irimi, would you? Neither should you atemi when the situation doesn't call for it.

2)You mean the modern society that still has murder, rape, robbery, abductions, etc.?

As there's a balance in everything, there's a balance between good and evil doers--this "modern society" hasn't done away with the need to defend oneself--nor, will the day soon come when it isn't beneficial to be able to defend one's self.

L. Camejo

06-13-2005 04:26 PM

Re: Value of atemi

Quote:

Dustin Acuff wrote:

I cannot speak from training but the only atemi I have seen (not been taught) are a bit unfriendly and uke would be lucky to only walk away from one with only a light displacement of balance.

Well the displacement of balance is not light, it results in Uke being thrown forcefully. However, this is from an Aikido perspective and I don't know if the DR folks apply atemi as a means of throwing without percussive hitting. Maybe someone else can shed some light here. To understand the application of atemi to disrupt balance and throw check this link for Atemi waza.

Quote:

Dustin Acuff wrote:

Being officers they tend to not want to hit people b/c of bad publicity, mountians of paperwork, and it just is not nice.

Yep, that makes sense.

Quote:

Dustin Acuff wrote:

The resistance was completely natural and as identical as possible in both scenarios, but it could not possibly be perfect.

Well this is it. Resistance takes on a whole new meaning when your mind is set to seriously and severely destroy your target. Unless you had this sort of mindset in your experiment I'd hazard to say that the degree of resistance was not "as identical as possible" to a possible prison scenario. To get a small idea of this sort of encounter check this thread on an actual Prison attack .

Quote:

Dustin Acuff wrote:

It is possible, if not probable, that if an atemi were misplaced then uke could use your own extention against you.

Possible only for someone not properly trained in executing atemi. One who is trained properly is able to generate enough power without giving away one's balance at all in the event of a miss. If this happens the person needs to work on targetting, centre and balance control imho. It is possible however for the person receiving the strike to disrupt the balance of the person applying the atemi by acting on their body in some way (before the strike actually lands) to create kuzushi. But this is because the Uke has taken the initiative and because the timing used in executing the atemi was poor on Tori's part, leaving an opening, but not because Tori has overextended the strike (and his balance) deliberately.

Quote:

Dustin Acuff wrote:

I guess my question could be rephrased as what are the value of atemi in kuzushi as opposed to blending and redirecting?

I think Lorien said it well above. Atemi and kuzushi are 2 aspects of Aikido's technical and strategic paradigm. In fact I'd doubt it if one could actually throw a non-compliant partner if one "blended" or "redirected" anything without at some point causing a disruption of the attacker's balance (kuzushi). As long as there is a throw or takedown, there is kuzushi, otherwise the person does not fall or roll away. Unless of course they are "taking a dive" of their own volition.;)

LC:ai::ki:

Keith_k

06-13-2005 05:06 PM

Re: Value of atemi

Striking, like any technique applied to self defense, is a tool. Like any tool, it works well for certain applications and poorly for other applications. I feel that it is better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it.

Proper striking is every bit as nuanced as any joint lock or throw. It often takes a great degree of training to execute truly effective strikes.

DustinAcuff

06-14-2005 04:58 PM

Re: Value of atemi

Again thanks for the comments!

I'd like to adress some things in no particular order:

We all fully understand that the atemi demonstrated were just that > for demonstration.

The only uses I have seen for atemi are ending fights via shattering bones or causing massive skeletal damage. The uses seen at the expo were along the lines of hitting uke 3-5 times then throwing him. I have never even heard of atemi being used to throw, and the concept actually is almost beyond comprehension. If you can touch someone and throw them then why hit them to throw?

I tend to agree with Ian in most areas. If DR was traditionally taught in three parts, which makes sense, then that is all well and good. But, by his own admission, Sensei is teaching us the way he wishes he was taught instead of the way he was. Ian's explination is quite probable.

I happily admit that there are no right or wrong answers to this question. One of the reasons I did not go to sensei is just to see what everyone else thinks and why. I am being trained the way that I am, I am happy with the way I am being trained, and I believe that with Sensei's past experience that he IS teaching us the way he would have liked to have been taught.

I understand that striking is a tool and has a purpose and IS worthy of being trained in. I spent the first 7 1/2 years of my total 8 years of MAs in striking arts in some shape form or fashion. I just wonder why strike when blending is easier and brings about greater affect without hurting uke.

Thanks for the great comments! Just to make sure everyone knows this, I'm not against atemi, just curious.

Dustin

LOL I just looked at the link for the animated atemi. That is a far cry from the atemi I have seen. It looks as if no strike is really even applied, more a movement of center and a appropriatey placed cut.

L. Camejo

06-14-2005 05:19 PM

Re: Value of atemi

Quote:

Dustin Acuff wrote:

LOL I just looked at the link for the animated atemi. That is a far cry from the atemi I have seen. It looks as if no strike is really even applied, more a movement of center and a appropriatey placed cut.

And they all can just as easily be applied as percussive strikes to damage bone, nerve and tissue structures. They are strike throws (which are a lot more powerful than strikes that stop at the point of contact). The point is to show that a strike can be a throw very easily with proper timing, body movement and distance control (all elements of both DR and Aikido).

It sounds like what you are referring to is atemi as finishing strikes rather than as initiating strikes or balance taking strikes (it's good to specify), which, though seen in many DR applications tend not to be as popular in many Aikido applications (except the typical shomen uchi to the face finish for pins). But then this is what one may get when asking DR questions on an Aikido forum. ;)

Gambatte.
LC:ai::ki:

Ron Tisdale

06-15-2005 08:32 AM

Re: Value of atemi

Quote:

Dustin Acuff wrote:

Again thanks for the comments!

I'd like to adress some things in no particular order:

We all fully understand that the atemi demonstrated were just that > for demonstration.

The only uses I have seen for atemi are ending fights via shattering bones or causing massive skeletal damage. The uses seen at the expo were along the lines of hitting uke 3-5 times then throwing him. I have never even heard of atemi being used to throw, and the concept actually is almost beyond comprehension. If you can touch someone and throw them then why hit them to throw?

As Larry has mentioned, atemi are used in many places, in many ways, for different purposes. Kondo Sensei has even refered to atemi as being one form of 'aiki', along with timing, breathing and other things. Which I think is a shocker for some. But I have found it to be something that rings true to me. There is a discussion of this in a thread on AJ that follows a review I did of one of Sensei's seminars.

Some examples would be when using the sokomen (side step) entry and evasion, strike with the raised middle knuckle of each hand under uke's rib cage. When this strike is well coordinated with your entry, it works well to release uke's grip, interupt their breathing and timing, take over their space, and steal the initiative back. Then from that angle (about 40 to 45 degrees to the side of uke) there are many techniques you can use. The object here isn't necessarily to break any bones (the floating ribs are somewhat vulnerable, though), but to accomplish the other things I mentioned. The strike by itself, may or may not work...the body movement by itself may or may not work...the idea is to make the very best conditions for your technique to succeed, so you combine as many elements as possible, given the circumstances.

Quote:

I tend to agree with Ian in most areas. If DR was traditionally taught in three parts, which makes sense, then that is all well and good. But, by his own admission, Sensei is teaching us the way he wishes he was taught instead of the way he was. Ian's explination is quite probable.

Nothing wrong with that. I personally prefer to have someone delineate the differences from their 'traditional' training and their innovations, but that's just me.

Quote:

I understand that striking is a tool and has a purpose and IS worthy of being trained in. I spent the first 7 1/2 years of my total 8 years of MAs in striking arts in some shape form or fashion. I just wonder why strike when blending is easier and brings about greater affect without hurting uke.

I think one of the issues people deal with is the difference between striking in arts like Tae Kwan Do or Karate, and striking in generic Japanese Jujutsu or specifically, Daito ryu. The goals and the methods may differ widely...which is why I personally am not in favor of adding strikes from other gendai or modern arts to aikido and then calling this cognate 'aikijutsu/aikijujutsu' etc. It isn't. If you want a model for striking in aikido, my belief is that you go to the source...Daito ryu. As to blending being easier and bringing about greater effect without hurting uke...I have a whole bunch of issues with that statement. Briefly,

I 'm not convinced that just blending works that well against serious attacks.

It may be easier in the short run, but if it doesn't work, Uh Oh...

If you combine your atemi with your body movement, atemi is very easy.

The greater control over uke and the earlier in the engagement that you have it, the more mercifull you can be in the long run.

Quote:

Thanks for the great comments! Just to make sure everyone knows this, I'm not against atemi, just curious.

Dustin

LOL I just looked at the link for the animated atemi. That is a far cry from the atemi I have seen. It looks as if no strike is really even applied, more a movement of center and a appropriatey placed cut.

The links are good examples of using the entry as atemi, the body for atemi, atemi as displacement of uke's center and body. Yoshinkan aikido uses principles like those illustrated as well.

Ron Tisdale wrote: [quote]I 'm not convinced that just blending works that well against serious attacks.

In theory it should, but it doesn't work very well for me! :) Maybe one day down the road!

I think you need to develop a full spectrum game from being able to blend to it not happening for some reason. I work on my long term game (Aikido), while developing my short term game (BJJ).

DustinAcuff

06-15-2005 11:28 PM

Re: Value of atemi

Ron, I am not sure how you intended it when you said that if you want striking in Aikido you believe that it is best to go to Daito, the source. Out of curioscity how did you mean that?

Kevin, we just started training Kito Ryu for a bit for ground. As someone who has practiced BJJ with a number of the major players in the world championship including one of the two time world champions, I can really say that Kito is FAR more effective, very like Daito on the ground. Small circle, pressure points, and a number of other things not allowed in BJJ are encouraged. Find Kito if you can!

Ron Tisdale

06-16-2005 09:31 AM

Re: Value of atemi

Quote:

Ron, I am not sure how you intended it when you said that if you want striking in Aikido you believe that it is best to go to Daito, the source. Out of curioscity how did you mean that?

Well, here's what I said...

Quote:

I think one of the issues people deal with is the difference between striking in arts like Tae Kwan Do or Karate, and striking in generic Japanese Jujutsu or specifically, Daito ryu. The goals and the methods may differ widely...which is why I personally am not in favor of adding strikes from other gendai or modern arts to aikido and then calling this cognate 'aikijutsu/aikijujutsu' etc. It isn't. If you want a model for striking in aikido, my belief is that you go to the source...Daito ryu.

I pretty much mean just that. There are a lot of gendai cognate arts out there that use the name Aikijutsu, aikijujutsu to denote aikido like movement with strikes and kicks added in. Personally, I don't buy it. Aikido isn't shotokan, or tae kwon do, or wing tsun. The movement patterns are different, the use of the body is different. If I evade and enter using one body movement style, then have to switch to power a reverse punch ala shotokan, then move to throw ala aikido, I'm switching the mechanics of my movement back and forth...that slows me down and throws off my timing. I believe even teachers like Koroiwa (who was a boxer before he came to aikido) had to make some changes to their movement to make what they did 'fit' the aikido paradigm of movement. Ellis Amdur might be able to speak to this more intelligently...he actually had the opportunity to train with Koroiwa.

Was that any clearer? Oh, Ellis has an excellent thread somewhere where he talks about atemi as irimi that sheds a lot of light on this subject. I can't remember if its here or at AJ. If I stumble across it in my wandering, I'll post the link.

Best,
Ron

DustinAcuff

06-16-2005 12:38 PM

Re: Value of atemi

Yeah that was alot clearer. I was not following your train of thought due to a lack of indepth knowledge on people crossbreeding arts etc, and was a bit confuzed. Thanks for clarifying.

Edit: Oh hang on, i just realised I do have something possibly worthwhile to say on this subject! Now I love my atemi, for many reasons: To end a confrontation, to enhance a technique, for kuzushi, for improving reflexes and for toughening up to others strikes.

Now, if your fighting super tough convicts who spend all day sitting in their cell banging themselves off concrete then ok, your atemi probably isnt going to bother them too much. however, the training that you have put into this area will also have conditioned you in some aspect towards others strikes. First defense are reflexes, you will have better reflexes from training with atemi. Second is moving out of the way, if you never practise atemi then you will have a handicap in avoiding them. Third is your response to the strike, if you get hit, what do you do next? If you are conditioned, perhaps not physically, but at least mentally to getting hit then you are in a much better position than the people who believe that they wont get hit and will then floor the other guy.

As a side point, if many people condition themselves against strikes,you can of course also condition your striking parts (hands, knees, elbows, head) as well. But im sure we all know this already.

If any convicts are reading this then I apologise If I offended you with my portrayl of you ;)

Kevin Leavitt

06-17-2005 02:07 PM

Re: Value of atemi

I am trying to integrate the principles of aikido in the stand up fighting I am learning/teaching in the Modern Army Combatives. I find that without the threat of strikes and kicks, things like iriminage, and kaitenage don't really work so well. Once we go "hot" on strikes and kicks, aikido starts having more relevance.

I would submit based on my experiences that without the threat or intent of atemi, that aikido really does not work very well.

L. Camejo

06-17-2005 02:31 PM

Re: Value of atemi

Quote:

Kevin Leavitt wrote:

I would submit based on my experiences that without the threat or intent of atemi, that aikido really does not work very well.

Interesting.

In my understanding, for any locking, pinning, takedown or throwing technique to work, there must be a disruption of balance (physical, mental etc.) of some sort. This can be achieved via atemi, movement, distractions and other means.

Since Aikido is an expression of Jujutsu it would make sense that disruption of balance (a la atemi or otherwise) would be necessary for any of the above mentioned categories of techniques to work. The same thing would apply for any other art that involves locking, pinning, takedown and throwing techniques. A person in balance can pretty much shut down any technique if he really wants to, the particular style or method he is practicing is irrelevant imo.

Think about it, are there any styles that apply locks or throws that actually work on a resistant opponent without first taking his balance (physical or otherwise) or distracting him? I haven't found one so far.

For those who drill and train seriously in it, kuzushi utilising positioning and movement is another aspect of Aikido that makes its techniques very viable against skilled resistance. Like atemi however, kuzushi by movement alone has its limitations so it is good to know and study as many ways as possible to disrupt the balance of your attacker.

Just my 2 cents.
LC:ai::ki:

DustinAcuff

06-17-2005 05:33 PM

Re: Value of atemi

I think I see what you are saying LC. When I was doing kickboxing we would have someone stand behind the bag or beside us and if we did not keep our hands up this person would tap our face as we initiated a technique. Just this touch disrupted the act of initiating a kick or punch entirey and caused the gears to stop for a moment. Is that kind of what you are mentioning?

I am not by any means trying to say atemi is useless or not worth knowing, just trying to establish its value in Aiki arts.

Kevin, why do you say that Aikido does not work in reality without atemi? Or am I misreading your response?

Kevin Leavitt

06-18-2005 05:33 AM

Re: Value of atemi

Larry covered it pretty good i think. Mainly I am speaking from the point from about 1 meter into the area of body contact range, sometimes called clinch range. Uke will not grab you "honestly" without the threat of atemi. He can stay centered and lock down on you. you will have a difficult time getting a ikkyo, nikyo, or sankyo if he can come in indiscriminately not having to worry about atemi.

However, with the presence, or hint of atemi, you can affect uke's balance/center and the dynamic changes. Some might call this KI projection :)